ArticleBMJ open2024
Effects of the enhanced recovery after surgery intervention for preventing postpartum depression: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPostpartum depression (PPD), a prevalent public health problem, is a debilitating mental disorder for which preventive interventions could yield dramatic benefits. However, viable approach focusing the prevention of PPD for caesarean section (CS) patients remains limited currently. In recent decades, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has gradually been implemented in CS and appears to be a potential and favourable preventive intervention for PPD, but systematic evidence on this issue is lacking. Therefore, a meta-analysis is designed to systematically explore the potential effect of ERAS on the prevention of PPD in CS patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Meta-analysis will be performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. A systematic search across the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, grey literature and Wanfang Database will be conducted from inception to July 2023. Relevant studies investigating the association between ERAS and PPD will be included. Two reviewers will independently carry out the literature selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Disagreements will be resolved by group consensus. Statistical analyses will use the RevMan V.5.3 and STATA V.13 software. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system will be used to evaluate the strength of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study raises no ethical issues. The pending meta-analysis may provide reliable evidence supporting ERAS as a viable preventive option for PPD in CS patients, further providing a useful reference for the health authorities and promoting the future clinical practice in this field. The formal results of this study will be submitted to a professional journal for publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023485929.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.